Author Naomi Wolf condemns UK's 'moral panic' on trans issues

[stumbledin]

Britain is in the grip of a “moral panic” about transgender issues, according to U.S. author Naomi Wolf, who said she was angry that trans women were being linked with predatory men having been a victim of rape herself. ...

“It’s always this mythology of a man dressed as a woman in ladies bathroom who’s going to rape a woman - which just doesn’t happen,” Wolf told the Thomson Reuters Foundation in a telephone interview, adding that women were far more at risk from men.

“Anyway there are already laws in place against you being molested by anyone in a bathroom.”

Wolf, 58, said every time she stood up for trans rights she was attacked online by “waves and waves of bots”.

And more like this at uk.reuters.com/article/britain-lgbt-history/interview-u-s-author-naomi-wolf-condemns-uks-moral-panic-on-trans-issues-idUSL8N2ID2IG

Just posting for information.

Not sure it is worth discussing, though needless to say she was an invited speaker at what should have been an event about Gay rights, but of course has been trans(formed) into a LGBTQ event.

Sigh.

Doesn't she have a point? If a man wants to attack a woman in a public toilet, he can simply go in and attempt it. There isn't a skirt detector on the door.

I have sympathy for some gender critical points of view, but the fixation with toilets is a bit silly.

Who is it that fixates on toilets? Do you think it's gender critical feminists?

@demolitionbarbie The point is that up to now women have always been able to look out for one another. If a man was spotted loitering in women's toilets he would be removed. Now we are told that he has every right to be there. This despite the fact that we know that unisex facilities are FAR riskier for women and girls. You might not think it makes a difference but the statistics show it does.

Why would anyone in this day and age who need to retain their credibility, choose someone who has lost credibility?

They are interested in people who can attract a large audience. The credibility of their choice doesn't matter. So long as the orthodox gospel is being delivered, then the dodginess fades into invisibility. Look at Peter Tatchell. Anyone with any sense would avoid him like the plague, but so long as he's delivering sexuality and gender orthodoxy people lose the ability to see his promotion of adults having sex with children or, worse, believe that if he's on the right side of history then doing wrong doesn't matter. Remember how long Yaniv was being supported by trans activists. He had to go into truly despicable behaviour before most, but crucially not all, decided to drop him.

“Anyway there are already laws in place against you being molested by anyone in a bathroom”

How does that work then, does a forcefield form around you or something? Do you have to switch it on when you go in or is automatic?

As soon as anyone describes safeguarding concerns as a moral panic I lose all respect for them.

@EyesOpening

“Anyway there are already laws in place against you being molested by anyone in a bathroom”

How does that work then, does a forcefield form around you or something? Do you have to switch it on when you go in or is automatic?

Yes, exactly, there are laws against molestation so nobody is ever molested. Nobody ever gets murdered either because it’s against the law, which is good.

The point is that up to now women have always been able to look out for one another. If a man was spotted loitering in women's toilets he would be removed. Now we are told that he has every right to be there.

I am always puzzled by people who purport not to understand this, I can never figure out if it's disingenuous or if they really are that incapable of thinking things through. I mean is it honestly possible to not get that? I've never seen an answer to this point either! The pattern is always:

• "rapists can go in the ladies' bathroom anyway"
• "yes we know but now we can't tell them to leave"
• "..."

It's so odd. I suppose I do understand why male people who have no regard for women's safety argue in this way, but I can't understand why women like Naomi Wolf do it.

“Anyway there are already laws in place against you being molested by anyone in a bathroom.”

There are laws against rape, discriminating against women (or others), disadvantaging pregnant woman, coercive and controlling partners, unequal pay etc. Doesn't mean this stuff doesn't happen. Doesn't mean I don't think about the route I take when I walk home in the dark.

I have sympathy for some gender critical points of view, but the fixation with toilets is a bit silly.

If you listen and understand the feminist perspective, you would see that it's not women who are being "a bit silly". It's the people who want remove womens spaces who are being 'silly' and constantly focus the discussion around public toilets.

The feminists are talking about women as a class, medical implications of removing the link between women and their biology, and the safeguarding implications of allowing men to hide their sex.

I wouldn't describe that as being 'silly' though. More abusive.

I think there is only one group fixated on toilets and it is not people on the FWR board. And it is deliberately made out to be 'silly' so that women shut the fuck up about the loss of single sex spaces in general. And the fact there is an obvious solution of creating third spaces. The plea is often, 'but they only want to peeee!'.

If women are reduced to arguing the toilet issue, no one focuses on the other issues. It is quite easy to see it in action if you look.

@DemolitionBarbie

Doesn't she have a point? If a man wants to attack a woman in a public toilet, he can simply go in and attempt it. There isn't a skirt detector on the door.

I have sympathy for some gender critical points of view, but the fixation with toilets is a bit silly.

Hello Vancouver Rape Crisis? hello being unable to request a female medical examiner after rape in Scotland. Not exactly keeping up are you?

But if a male person tries to walk into a ladies loo or changing rooms, you can scream blue bloody murder and security will come running.

If this is allowed to continue to its logical conclusion - any man can saunter into a woman’s space, head held high, beard in face, topless with hairy beer belly hanging out - no questions asked. For the purposes of sanity I’m calling this person Diddly.

Diddly won’t look odd or out of place because people won’t ask if Diddly should be there -because they won’t want to be accused of being a honking bigot will they? It won’t be on Diddly to prove that they should be in there but on everyone else to prove that Diddly shouldn’t - but whose word is taken as truth? Women will give up trying to exclude men from the ladies loos and changing areas because they will be just abused if they try to police the areas themselves - because it seems that one person incorrectly challenged is a million times worse than a woman attacked by a male who had no right to be there.

Diddly could be like the Bunce and use the ladies look Monday’s Wednesdays and Fridays and every other Sunday. See how batshit this is actually sounding now.

And yes, men will take advantage. A rapist or attacker won’t let a little thing like telling a fib get in the way will they?

(Yes Diddly was in jail in Scotland and Diddly says Diddly is female - photographed being loaded into a police van topless with Diddly-belly hanging out and all...)

@DemolitionBarbie

Doesn't she have a point? If a man wants to attack a woman in a public toilet, he can simply go in and attempt it. There isn't a skirt detector on the door.

I have sympathy for some gender critical points of view, but the fixation with toilets is a bit silly.

I think if you stick around here, you'll see that GC feminists are not fixated with toilets.

However, it is where TRAs would like the focus to be. TRAs would very much like the focus to be firmly away from prisons, intimate health care, transitioning of children and women's sport. TRAs will often try to bring a thread about an unrelated topic back to toilets.

Tell me, if you were a Trans Rights Activist or Ally, why would you want to keep the focus on toilets and bathrooms? Why would you not want people thinking about the bigger picture and wider implications of re-defining the word 'woman' to include male-bodied people?

@DemolitionBarbie

Doesn't she have a point? If a man wants to attack a woman in a public toilet, he can simply go in and attempt it. There isn't a skirt detector on the door.

I have sympathy for some gender critical points of view, but the fixation with toilets is a bit silly.

But then what’s the point of any segregation or attempt to keep women safe? After all, a man can just choose to ignore it if he really wants to attack a woman. By that logic, why should I bother locking my house or car. After all, a thief who really wants to steal stuff won’t be put off by the locks.

The point is that by segregating by sex, you will deter 9 out of 10 men who don’t want to draw attention to themselves or simply can’t be arsed. Yes you might get the odd psycho who just marches on in anyway but most potential offenders probably won’t bother. If you make it easy, either by having unisex toilets or by normalising the presence of male people in the female space, you will be creating opportunities that otherwise wouldn’t be there. And that’s why surprise surprise there are more sexual assaults in unisex spaces.

It's a bizarre way of thinking. If this safety measure don't remove 100% of the risk in all circumstances it's not worth bothering with and so we'll bin the measure.

In way other area of life would that reasoning be applied?

@Conniethesensible

Ok fine, lady has an rational opinion which reflects study carried out. link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13178-018-0335-z

We good here now? :)

It doesn't. That study is as far too many of its kind not indicative of anything. We analysed this on a previous thread in detail and the quality of the data is so low, how they got away with making these claims and get this published is anyone's guess.

Sorry, I’m not sure if I’m putting this on the right thread, there seems to be some crossover (and apologise if it seems like a derail, it isn’t).

But someone has said on one of these threads that Self ID has to be probable so call the police and if it’s bullshit all ok! Well firstly, no it isn’t and secondly what is this hypothetical woman to do whilst she waits for the police? What stops this hypothetical and anonymous male legging it?
And (here’s the deraily bit) I have an insta account which is about buying second hand. I follow accounts that either buy or sell second hand clothes and household goods. Quite fluffy and inconsequential. Mostly women, mostly mums and among the bric a brac and 80s jumpers I’m seeing LOTS of posts about anxiety- from “needed a quiet day, feeling stressed and anxious today” up to “just been to hospital for too fast heart rate.” And much of that is down to Covid. We are seeing anxiety and mental health problems mushrooming as women cope with a pandemic, caring responsibilities, childcare, home education and working from home.

Who in their right mind feels this is conducive to stopping by someone in a public toilet or changing room and challenging them? I know there will always be some women who say “nothing frightens me, I’ll wrestle a crocodile, punch out a lion and confront any man!” but right now that doesn’t feel like everyone’s lives.

I'm reviving this to post this gem. Lockdown has hit some harder than others. Twitter is enjoying this.

Oh dear, Naomi. 😆 That truly is a gem!

[quote OldCrone]No man is abusing this, just like no one is abusing the self-ID laws in Ireland

So these are genuine transwomen then? In that case, we're not 'fearmongering' about transwomen, since some of them are violent sex offenders.

www.dublinlive.ie/news/dublin-news/sex-offender-undergoing-male-female-16623261

www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/teenager-in-custody-charged-with-threats-to-kill-two-people-39562763.html[/quote]
Allow these peeps on cross hormones and they soon will have no interest in sexual offending. Its effectively self elected chemical castration.

She is hilariously stupid. Or is she mad? I am starting to suspect as much.

As you say, some great Twitter responses, including: "Naomi Wolf has known about time travel for TWO YEARS and has yet to save a single wrongfully executed Victorian. Shameful."

and

"We're a loose-knit community of academics and scientists pledged to misleading Dr Naomi Wolf by performing pre-scripted bullshit scenarios in restaurants and within earshot. Once she repeats these in a public arena our job is done. We're crowd-funded, but would do it pro bono."

To try to understand the latest events I went to look at Naomi Wolf's twitter. It hurt my head so much I simply had to close that tab. Does she have people around her who can stage an intervention?

She’s gone full David Icke.
Time travel through vaccines 🤣